From: | Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Gaetano Mendola <mendola(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: shared_buffers performance |
Date: | 2008-04-14 15:42:50 |
Message-ID: | Pine.GSO.4.64.0804141132580.3587@westnet.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Mon, 14 Apr 2008, Gaetano Mendola wrote:
> I'm using postgres 8.2.3 on Red Hat compiled with GCC 3.4.6.
8.2.3 has a performance bug that impacts how accurate pgbench results are;
you really should be using a later version.
> http://img84.imageshack.us/my.php?image=totalid7.png
> as you can see using 64MB as value for shared_buffers I'm obtaining
> better results.
I'm assuming you've read my scaling article at
http://www.westnet.com/~gsmith/content/postgresql/pgbench-scaling.htm
since you're using the graph template I suggest there.
If you look carefully at your results, you are getting better results for
higher shared_buffers values in the cases where performance is memory
bound (the lower scale numbers). Things reverse so that more buffers
gives worse performance only when your scale >100. I wouldn't conclude
too much from that. The pgbench select test is doing a low-level
operation that doesn't benefit as much from having more memory available
to PostgreSQL instead of the OS as a real-world workload will.
--
* Greg Smith gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Smith | 2008-04-14 15:44:44 | Re: shared_buffers performance |
Previous Message | Bill Moran | 2008-04-14 13:12:12 | Re: db size |